The field of Marketing research in Ireland has experienced significant growth since the 1960s, when the first Irish market research agencies, Irish Marketing Surveys and Market Research Bureau of Ireland, were established. Today, there are various companies in the market that offer comprehensive market research services using both qualitative and quantitative techniques (Domegan and Fleming, 2007). Quantitative research focuses on objectivity, while qualitative research is more subjective.
Quantitative research aims to find explanatory laws, while qualitative research focuses on in-depth description. According to Denzin & Lincoln (2003), qualitative research is a situated activity that interprets and makes visible the world through a set of interpretative practices. It seeks to understand the meaning people bring to phenomena and explores factors that influence buying decisions. Qualitative research is subjective and impressionistic, probing rather than counting. Domegan and Fleming (2007) support this grounded approach, stating that qualitative research aims to explore and discover issues about a problem because there is limited knowledge available.
There is typically uncertainty about the dimensions and characteristics of a problem. It uses ‘soft’ data and obtains ‘rich’ data (2007: 24). According to Schmalensee and Lesh (1999), qualitative research has the main advantage of identifying areas for further research and uncovering underlying attitudes, beliefs, and motives that quantitative methodologies cannot understand. However, Domegan and Fleming (2007) argue that its advantage lies mainly in generating ideas for new product development, packaging, design, strategy, branding, or image. Marshall and Rossman (1989) suggest that the primary disadvantage of qualitative methodologies is that they always have sources of influence in an interview context that cannot be minimized or controlled. Alvesson & Deetz (2000) further add three basic difficulties with qualitative research: there are complexities in the effects of researcher-interviewee interaction and compliance, statements can be influenced by the interview situation rather than any specific ‘experiential reality’ (honesty) (2000: 70). According to Malhotra (1996), an in-depth interview is a lengthy personal interview aimed at uncovering primary attitudes, beliefs, and motivations.According to Lincoln (2003), Domegan and Fleming (2007), and O’Sullivan (2008), implementing this technique can lead to exceptional outcomes; however, it mandates meticulous planning, training, and preparation.
However, according to Malhotra (1996) and Domegan and Fleming (2007), there are weaknesses in the technique of focus groups. They point out that sample sizes are small and statistical extrapolation of findings becomes a problem. Domegan and Fleming (2007) also mention that it is difficult to regulate interviewer bias, leading to limited use of this technique. They state that focus groups are generally capable of providing the same information at a lower cost (2007: 174).
Chisnell (2001) explains that projective techniques use indirect methods borrowed from clinical psychology to obtain data that cannot be secured through direct questioning. Malhotra (1996), Alvesson & Deetz (2000), Chisnall (2001), Denzin & Lincoln (2003), and Domegan and Fleming (2007) all agree that this type of technique allows for delving below surface responses to obtain true feelings, unlock attitudes or subconscious motivations. They also emphasize that the purpose of the research must be disguised.
There are various types of techniques, according to Domegan and Fleming (2007). They define observational research as a method of generating data whereby the researcher immerses themselves in a research setting and systematically observes dimensions of that setting, including interactions, relationships, actions, events, etc., without communication. Denzin & Lincoln (2003) agree and categorize observations as structured or unstructured, direct or indirect, and natural or contrived. Domegan and Fleming (2007) also include two additional types: open or disguised and human or mechanical. Although Chisnell (2001) does not mention any drawbacks to observations, Bailey, Bemrose et al (1995) highlight the problems with consistency in utilizing this technique.
According to Domegan and Fleming (2007), Denzin & Lincoln (2003), and Malhotra (1996), observation has the benefit of measuring actual behavior rather than intended or preferred behavior. However, it also has the limitation of not being able to examine the fundamental motives, beliefs, and preferences underlying that behavior. Additionally, Malhotra (1996), Alvesson & Deetz (2000), Chisnall (2001), Denzin & Lincoln (2003), and Domegan and Fleming (2007) all agree that ethical issues need to be considered when choosing observation as a research methodology.
According to Bailey, Bemrose et al (1995), research ethics involve the researcher ensuring the well-being of participants (1995: 4). Denzin & Lincoln (2003) propose three qualitative research methods that are not widely supported by other relevant articles: interpretation of documents and material culture, visual methods such as photography and image capture, and personal narrative and reflexivity. Malhotra (1996) and Domegan and Fleming (2007) define measurement as the assignment of numbers or symbols to object characteristics according to specified rules (1996: 271 and 2007: 337 respectively). After defining variables, scaling becomes important. Malhotra (1996), Denzin & Lincoln (2003), and Domegan and Fleming (2007) agree on the use of nominal, ordinal, and interval scales. The nominal scale identifies mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive data (e.g. PPS number, student ID number). The ordinal scale goes beyond nominal, allowing for greater than and less than comparisons. However, it does not measure how much greater or less. The interval scale possesses the characteristics of ordinal as well as allowing for equality of difference. It is important to note that the interval scale is arbitrary and lacks a fixed zero point.The Ratio Scale includes all the properties of an interval scale, but it also has a significant absolute zero.
Once the variables and a scale are agreed, there are various techniques used for measuring qualitative data. Malhotra (1996), Denzin & Lincoln (2003), and Domegan and Fleming (2007) categorize these techniques into scaling techniques such as Thurstone, Likert, Semantic differential, and Stapel scales. Bailey, Bemrose et al (1995) suggest that qualitative data should be presented using specific measurement tools.
Quantitative research emphasizes the measurement and analysis of causal relationships between variables, rather than processes (2003: 13). Alvesson & Deetz (2000) support this notion by stating that quantitative research aims to reduce ambiguity by transforming perceptions into pre-structured, quantifiable categories. Typical methods include using existing statistics, observation scales, tests, questionnaires, and experiments (2000: 55).
Quantitative research has significant advantages in business, where managers rely on numerical information to make decisions (1997: 1). However, Schulze (2003) argues that quantitative research is better suited for theory testing and developing universal statements, and thus can only provide a general overview of a situation.This type of research generates generalizable results that may overlook the reality of specific situations. This statement is universally agreed upon by all references. Malhotra (1996) defines a survey as “Interviews with a large number of respondents using a predesigned questionnaire” (1996: 130). Domegan and Fleming (2007) propose seven conditions that must be met to obtain meaningful results from a survey, while acknowledging that there are potential sources of error in each condition.
In section 2. 5. 4, the text addresses observations. In qualitative research, observational research involves the researcher immersing themselves in a research setting and systematically observing various aspects of that setting without any communication. This method generates data and is divided into ongoing and current behavior (Domegan and Fleming, 2007).
According to Waters (2001), observations can provide numerical data on various factors such as productivity, demand, output, and costs. Malhotra (1996) categorizes quantitative observational studies as either longitudinal or cross-sectional. Waters (2001) agrees with this classification and adds that a longitudinal study involves repeated observation of the same items over a long period of time, as explained by Domegan and Fleming (2007).
There are various types of longitudinal studies, including cohort studies and panel studies. A cross sectional study, on the other hand, involves observing a sample all at the same time and can be described as a snapshot (Chisnell, 2001). Other types of studies include (text:list) (text:list) (text:list) (text:list) (text:list) (text:list) (text:list).
In conclusion, Mahony and Goertz (2006) presented a summary table highlighting the differences and uses of qualitative and quantitative research. References: Carlson, L. 2008. Qualitative vs Quantitative Research Traditions: A Needless and Useless Debate’, International Journal of Advertising, vol 27, no. 4, pp 660-663; Wright, A. 2006. An Empirical Study of the Importance of American Importance to Ireland: An Emotional, Connectional and Motivational Context, Ph. D. Cork Institute of Technology; Schmalensee, D. H., and Lesh, A. D. 1999. ‘How to Make Research More Actionable: Addressing the number one challenge for today’s researchers’, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 10, no. 4, pp 22-36.
